From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263424AbUADUew (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Jan 2004 15:34:52 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263568AbUADUew (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Jan 2004 15:34:52 -0500 Received: from h80ad253c.async.vt.edu ([128.173.37.60]:26279 "EHLO turing-police.cc.vt.edu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263424AbUADUev (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Jan 2004 15:34:51 -0500 Message-Id: <200401042034.i04KYm1P024587@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.6.3 04/04/2003 with nmh-1.0.4+dev To: Rob Love Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Pentium M config option for 2.6 In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 04 Jan 2004 11:33:08 EST." <1073233988.5225.9.camel@fur> From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu References: <200401041227.i04CReNI004912@harpo.it.uu.se> <1073228608.2717.39.camel@fur> <20040104162516.GB31585@redhat.com> <1073233988.5225.9.camel@fur> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="==_Exmh_873559510P"; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 15:34:47 -0500 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --==_Exmh_873559510P Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 11:33:08 EST, Rob Love said: > I actually like this patch (perhaps since I have a P-M :) and think it > ought to go in, although I agree with others that the P-M is more of a > super-P3 than a scaled down P4. Same here - /proc/cpuinfo says: vendor_id : GenuineIntel cpu family : 15 model : 2 model name : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 Mobile CPU 1.60GHz Question for those more knowledgeable: Are there any known Pentium4 features enabled in the kernel with the PENTIUM4 options that simply Will Not Work on a 4M chipset (similar to a kernel built for a 586 not working on a 486), or are the differences limited to "sub-optimal performance" (for example, compiling with -mpentium4 results in code that runs but schedules less optimally)? If there are, they must be fairly obscure corner cases, since I haven't knowingly hit one in several months.. :) 2.7 timeframe - are there any added features of a P4 core we would *like* to exploit that aren't on a P4M? --==_Exmh_873559510P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 iD8DBQE/+HjncC3lWbTT17ARAkFkAJ9AsX5R/v6msInljHkPs0eTJ/EkRgCfUnzi E4ShLnhhTH+NZ7mbd5DjgY0= =lIZi -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --==_Exmh_873559510P--